[EM] To Bill Lewis Clark re: stepping-stone

Dave Ketchum davek at clarityconnect.com
Thu Jan 29 18:24:02 PST 2004

On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 16:12:14 -0800 (PST) Forest Simmons wrote:

> On Wed, 28 Jan 2004, Dave Ketchum wrote:
>>On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:09:00 -0800 (PST) Forest Simmons wrote:
>>>On Tue, 27 Jan 2004, Dave Ketchum wrote:
>>>>On Mon, 26 Jan 2004 11:11:32 -0800 (PST) Forest Simmons wrote:
>>>> > On Sat, 24 Jan 2004, Dave Ketchum wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >>IRV is not as similar to runoff as some claim - at runoff time I know the
>>>> >>result of the original vote; with IRV I must do all of my ranking at
>>>>one time.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >
>>>> > For sincere voters, i.e. voters bound and determined to vote their
>>>> > favorite among the uneliminated candidates at every stage no matter the
>>>> > consequences ... for these dyed-in-the-wool sincere voters the two methods
>>>> > are essentially equivalent, except for events that might change opinions
>>>> > about favorites between trips to the polls.
>>>> >
>>>>To decide how important that is, we have to decipher what percentage of
>>>>the voters qualify as "sincere".
>>>>And even they sometimes have to react as I suggested - look back at the
>>>>French election we keep looking at:
>>>>       For MOST voters the favorite to stay with was NOT Chirac.
>>>>       For MOST voters the favorite to stay with was NOT Le Pan.
>>>>       So the MANY voters who fit both of those descriptions had both the
>>>>opportunity and requirement to do new thinking at runoff time.
>>>>NOTE - responding as required by circumstances does not require changing
>>>>opinions about favorites - those who voted for Chirac over Le Pen did not
>>>>necessarily consider Chirac to be even tolerable, let alone a favorite -
>>>>they were only doing the best they could with the hand that had been dealt.
>>>Note that I said "... favorite among the uneliminated ..." meaning the
>>>uneliminated candidate preferred above the other uneliminated candidates.
>>I also saw your emphasis on "essentially equivalent", and chose to respond
>>to that thought last time.
>>Now you put more emphasis on "favorite among the uneliminated", which is
>>meaningful only in a method that is different by having an actual separate
> If your ranked preference ballot is sincere, then after the eliminated
> candidates have been crossed off, the top ranked uneliminated candidate on
> your ballot is your favorite among the uneliminated.

We must be using different dictionaries.  Per mine, anyone needs some 
liking before they say "favorite". The desperate Frenchman who voted for 
Chirac as the only available way to vote against Le Pen did not 
necessarily have any liking for Chirac.

Anyway this is a distraction from what I said earlier about differences:
      In Plurality I decide on and vote for a single preferred candidate. 
  If a runoff follows, I make a new decision based on the list of 
candidates now available.
      In IRV I make the complex decision about ranking before the single 
election event.
      I STILL consider these methods to require different efforts from the 

> Forest

  davek at clarityconnect.com    people.clarityconnect.com/webpages3/davek
  Dave Ketchum   108 Halstead Ave, Owego, NY  13827-1708   607-687-5026
            Do to no one what you would not want done to you.
                  If you want peace, work for justice.

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list